Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Biological Case Against Race
American Outlook, publication of the Hudson Institute ^ | Spring 2002 | Joseph L. Graves Jr.

Posted on 06/04/2002 5:24:31 PM PDT by cornelis

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-329 next last
Typos mine.
1 posted on 06/04/2002 5:24:32 PM PDT by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *crevo_list
bump
2 posted on 06/04/2002 5:25:59 PM PDT by JediGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
bttt for future reading.
3 posted on 06/04/2002 5:29:26 PM PDT by Don Myers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry;RadioAstronomer;jennyp;AndrewC;VadeRetro;gore3000;ConsistentLibertarian;general_re...
bump (hope i got most of y'all)
4 posted on 06/04/2002 5:29:57 PM PDT by JediGirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
Oh, cut that out!

:^ 0 Ice cream everybody!!!!!

5 posted on 06/04/2002 5:32:11 PM PDT by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
so....black men aren't really better endowed?
6 posted on 06/04/2002 5:34:07 PM PDT by Demosthenes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
Thanks for the article. I was especially interested to read how theories of race arrived rather suddenly in the 19th century. Good example of how science itself is determined by history and culture.

I was brought up in the "post-racist" world, and all my education, and those whom I looked up to, taught that there is no real difference based on color. I know this sounds frightful, but over the years I have come to feel that there are real differences between the races. I have based this on experience, and travel, and learning to recongise and respect difference. It is hard to say if these differences are the result of culture or race.

One consequence of modern reproductive technologies is that we will be able to determine if genetic material, on its own, can determine individual characteristics. Up until now, the only studies done on "acquired vs inherited" characteristics, have been done on identical twins seperated a birth (limited and unreliable studies.)

7 posted on 06/04/2002 5:37:36 PM PDT by BlackVeil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
To summarize: Bla bla bla Lysenkoism bla bla bla nonsense data bla bla bla egalitarianism bla bla bla equality bla bla bla submission bla bla bla give more bla bla bla surrender it's hopeless bla bla bla just give more money bla bla bla and then die already.

BTW - did you know that chimps and humans differ in their DNA by only 1.5%? We're about 98.5% identical! So, I guess we're really just the same as chimps! And we're really just the same as the gorillas and the spider monkeys as well. Heck, we're probably only about %5 different from a shark! We should make sharks citizens! Oh, wait, we already have lawyers, that's right.

What a seriously rank load of hogwash. I'm no genetic scientist but I can look at Africa and see just what happens when the Europeans who built cities on that continent leave those cities behind to the natives. Hmmm, some peoples build cities, some peoples tear them down. No, no difference between them at all. Then I look here at formerly great cities like Detroit, populated with people who have been American citizens for generations. Hmmm. What do these examples have in common?

This is a very serious case of the Emperor having no clothes whatsoever.

8 posted on 06/04/2002 5:42:31 PM PDT by Billy_bob_bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlackVeil
It is hard to say if these differences are the result of culture or race.

Culture and individual variation are the major determinants of behavior. Race is a strong self-association factor -- we grow up with our own race, we tend to hand around with our own race, hence cultural identity tends to break along racial groupings.

9 posted on 06/04/2002 5:42:47 PM PDT by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Demosthenes
so . . . black men really aren't black?
10 posted on 06/04/2002 5:44:10 PM PDT by ThinkLikeWaterAndReeds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: BlackVeil
I know this sounds frightful, but over the years I have come to feel that there are real differences between the races.

There ARE real differences, and there's nothing frightful about speaking the truth. Acknowledging that there are differences does not make one a "racist" any more than acknowledging that the differences between men and women aren't just "social constructs" makes one a "sexist". Some of the differences make people of different races generally better at/worse at specific functions of modern life, but there are such huge variations within each race, that this does not provide justification for different treatment of people of different races. It does, however, provide nullification of the concept that unequal results are necessarily the result of "discrimination" -- a concept which remains quite popular in our legal system.

12 posted on 06/04/2002 5:49:23 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
Scientists now know that this was a false proposition, both at the level of the physical features and of the genes that produce them.

Scientists don't "know" any such thing! This is merely wishful thinking - something that the Hudson Institute specializes in.

First, any student anatomist can identify a person's race by a variety of physical features. Forensic pathologists can often identify a person's race by a single tooth or a few bones.

Second, when it comes to genes, it is much more honest to say that based on the current state of knowledge scientists cannot identify a person's race by analyzing his genes. To point out that there is very little genetic diversity between humans of all races does not mean there aren't meaningful differences between the races. Sometimes, a single genetic defect can make a HUGE difference in a person's wellbeing. Or, look at it this way: Chimps and humans share over 98% of their genetic makeup. Clearly, that 2% makes a LOT of difference.

What bothers me most about this pseudo-scientific hokum that tries to say there are no differences between the races is that it begs the question: Why the disparity in behavior and outcomes? If we are all the same, then why do blacks - 13% of the population - make up only 2% of corporate executives and commit 50% of the crime? Why has black student achievement lagged that of whites at the same rate for nearly 30 years - ever since the government has measured it - despite $billions of government money? If we are all the same - THEN WHITE PEOPLE MUST BE RACIST OPPRESSORS WHO WILL NOT/CANNOT CHANGE. If you were black and believed that the only reason you were not doing as well as whites was because they have been keeping you down for hundreds of years and show no sign of every stopping, how long would YOU put up with this situation?

13 posted on 06/04/2002 5:49:46 PM PDT by Arleigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
From the article:
The core ideological principle that maintains racism is the mistaken belief that
[1] biological races really exist in the human species and that
[2] individual aspects of character and morality can be identified by one's racial ancestry.
I donno ... Most people have always assumed that #1 is true, but I never believed in #2. I don't see why the two propositions have to go together.
14 posted on 06/04/2002 5:51:29 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
An excellent summary.

I would put forth that most "racial" variations of behavior are more due to cultural influences than genetic.

15 posted on 06/04/2002 5:52:45 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I would put forth that most "racial" variations of behavior are more due to cultural influences than genetic.

LOL, what a coincidence! That's what the author claims in his book! You are a whiz.

16 posted on 06/04/2002 5:59:51 PM PDT by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I would put forth that most "racial" variations of behavior are more due to cultural influences than genetic.

Well, you would be wrong.

Twin studies show that genetics accounts for 97% of variability in fingerprints (duh!); 70% of IQ, 50% of sexual behavior, 50% of criminal activity and 40% of social attitudes.

Average IQ level of blacks is 15 points lower than whites. Average testosterone levels are 10-20% higher in college-age black males than whites. IQ and testosterone levels are key ingredients in behavior among young males.

17 posted on 06/04/2002 6:00:21 PM PDT by Arleigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
"there are differences ... but there are such huge variations within each race, that this does not provide justification for different treatment ... It does, however, provide nullification of the concept that unequal results are necessarily the result of "discrimination" ...

I agree completely. It isn't about despising anyone. In fact many racial/or cultural characteristics are about being adjusted to ones way of life and environment. But I think that it should make Western law-givers, in aid agencies and the UN etc., a bit less confident about telling various nations that they should get rid of this or that "repressive" social restriction. Maybe they should, but it is up to them to work it out. And maybe they shouldn't, because sometimes things which appear harsh to us in fact serve a useful function within a different society.

18 posted on 06/04/2002 6:01:44 PM PDT by BlackVeil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BlackVeil
Yes, anyone who is not totally politically correct knows that the differences between the races are very real (i.e. white men really can't jump). The difference between human DNA and that of a chimpanzee is only on the order of 1%, yet no one expects chimps to get PhDs. Before anyone brands this racist thinking (versus racial thinking), you have to ask what the consequences of this information should be.

While there are no Shaqs from the Phillipines and no Einsteins from South Africa, there are Thomas Sowells and Michelle Kwans and multitudes of gifted people of all colors who can only be sorted through the give and take of free societies. And who decides what is smart or athletic, the criteria change continuously? The oldest bloodlines come out of Africa, according to Cavalli Sforza (who is big in the anti-race debate). Yet, given that datum how stupid could Shaq be making as much in a year as most make in a few lifetimes?

So, the question is not whether there are differences, but what you would do about it if there were. And bluntly, you'd do nothing but let people attain their own levels. So, I believe the above article is a feel-good sham, but the truth wouldn't change anything anyway, we all have to get up in the morning and go to work. I just wish I worked for the Lakers.

19 posted on 06/04/2002 6:02:17 PM PDT by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
Given that the entirety of his discussion is concerned with genetic differences and that very, very few individuals have had their genome mapped, his writings are nothing but speculation, uninformed opinion, and complete bullsh!t. Furthermore, minor genetic differences are easily shown between all major racial groups and especially between certain isolated southern africans and all other groups including most other africans and all caucasian, oriental, and australian subgroups. How can he be ignorant of past studies in his own field?

What a utterly hopeless mess of a book - ten years from now he will have to write a complete retraction.

20 posted on 06/04/2002 6:04:03 PM PDT by balrog666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Race Bannon
You'd better get here quick and prove you exist.



21 posted on 06/04/2002 6:05:52 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arleigh
Twin studies show that genetics accounts for 97% of variability in fingerprints (duh!); 70% of IQ, 50% of sexual behavior, 50% of criminal activity and 40% of social attitudes.

Those same twin studies "prove" a genetic link to homosexuality. I question the twin studies that indicate such things, because the famous ones are based on severely flawed models.

Average IQ level of blacks is 15 points lower than whites.

The Stanford-Binet test does presuppose some cultural knowledge. Once you correct for socioeconomic factors, that 15-point gap vanishes to within the MOE.

Average testosterone levels are 10-20% higher in college-age black males than whites.

What was the sample pool for this study? How many blacks versus whites in college are "juicing up" with steroids to compete in sports?

IQ and testosterone levels are key ingredients in behavior among young males.

True enough. However, what factors outside of genetics influence these ingredients?

22 posted on 06/04/2002 6:06:43 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
I personally believe their are mostly culteral differances, which are affected by enviormental conditions and historical affects. However, there is evidence of certain biological differances. Indians prefer spicier food, African-americans prefer fruitier drinks (magic johnsons company actually did the research that proved that one), etc. Then there is prone to types of disease, athletism. African americans are in general more athletic there any other type of black group in the world, orinetals generally are not size wise comparabel to europeans, etc. There are differences, we should do research into the whys.
23 posted on 06/04/2002 6:07:54 PM PDT by Sonny M
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote
Nicely put.
24 posted on 06/04/2002 6:11:48 PM PDT by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Comment #25 Removed by Moderator

To: Sonny M
African americans are in general more athletic there any other type of black group in the world

I wonder how athletic the Masai are rated...their manhood ritual consists of hunting a lion with a spear. Now THAT is sport!

26 posted on 06/04/2002 6:13:54 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Arleigh
The prison population contains a disproportiate number of "supermales" with XYY genomes. They are less intelligent, more aggressive and have statistically higher criminal tendencies than normal "XY" males.
27 posted on 06/04/2002 6:14:02 PM PDT by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Funny Guy!

Funny Place!! Where's that sign? "We Hire the Handicapped!"??

28 posted on 06/04/2002 6:16:05 PM PDT by RaceBannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin
Isn't the "XYY" genome somewhat questionable? I seem to recall reading that the evidence is thin (and some would say anorexic), with a lot of controversy surrounding the interpretation of the evidence.
29 posted on 06/04/2002 6:16:08 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

To: Billy_bob_bob
It's all about Culture and religion. Christian nations thrive, pagan nations fall.
31 posted on 06/04/2002 6:17:28 PM PDT by RaceBannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
Good God what a confused article.

Ok - first of all he presents some analysis of statistics that show that the DNA diversity between human races is less than that what biologists use to define races or subspecies. Fine, by that definition, humanity is one race. By that definition, fine -- so what?

From this he determines that the assumption that there is significant biological variation amongst groups of humans is false, and that racial categories are socially constructed. Baloney. One example that comes to mind is the difference between East and West African runners. One strong in the sprints, the other in long distances. Or I look at the big men in the NBA - a higher percentage of blacks than in the general population, even though I am one of thousands of white men who would have given our eye tooth to be there, but I'm too short and suffer from white man's disease: white men can't jump.

He goes on to deduce that it's just recent history and racial myth. And he equates thinking to the contrary with racial supremists, such as those who might think that Europeans stand at the pinnacle of perfection, using such thinking to make it legitimate to declare the African slave as chattel. Well, since no person would admit in this day and age to such racist thinking, the contrary position must be right -- that there are no statistically significant biological differences as a group. Baloney. There are clearly such differences, just not large enough to pass the threshold for a separate subspecies.

One way I like to put the point is thus. Say I task you with forming a winning basketball team, and I say you have a choice of two players, one black and one white. I refuse to tell you anything else about these two. In such a case, your best bet would be to pick the black player. Now it might turn out that the black player was Colin Powell, and the white player was Larry Bird. In which case you made the wrong choice, for lack of sufficient information. But given what information you had, you did the right thing.

From all these false arguments, he goes on to determine that racism can be easily deconstructed -- it's just a social disease. But he has changed the topic here entirely.

Racism is unfairly prejudging someone on basis of their race. Any competent basketball team wouldn't ask who's black and pick them, sight unseen. They would find out how well they had played, and how well they could play now. And Larry Bird would beat Colin Powell for such a position everytime, as easily as Tiger Woods would beat me at golf, or I would beat Tiger at computer programming.

However he is not taking racism as this, but rather taking it as any making of statistically significant differences between the human races, which he is saying is just a social confusion which we can easily deconstruct.

I'm not sure where he is going with these confusions, but they can't possibly serve us well.

32 posted on 06/04/2002 6:17:29 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
"The Stanford-Binet test does presuppose some cultural knowledge. Once you correct for socioeconomic factors, that 15-point gap vanishes to within the MOE."

I think the 15-point gap is pretty consistent over all the common IQ tests.

33 posted on 06/04/2002 6:19:09 PM PDT by Irene Adler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Comment #34 Removed by Moderator

To: FastCoyote
Me too, and I don't mean as water boy.
35 posted on 06/04/2002 6:19:47 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

That race cannot be biologically defined is objective fact.

Animosity demonstrated here against this simple observation is very irrational.

What's y'all's problem?

36 posted on 06/04/2002 6:20:46 PM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
What's y'all's problem?

I reckon they's not likin' it.

37 posted on 06/04/2002 6:22:17 PM PDT by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
Darwin outlined the basic reasoning that still stands today concerning the races of mankind. Darwin pointed out that if we used the techniques that naturalists used to identify race in nonhuman species, we would conclude that there really were no races in anatomically modern humans. Over one hundred and forty years of research have demonstrated that Darwin’s reasoning was correct.

OK. So a rose is a rose by any other name. Darwin, what a genius.

As I have stated before: if you take, “A Pygmy and an Eskimo”, and add, “walk into a bar” – you got the beginnings of a pretty good joke.
The punch line is Evolution…

38 posted on 06/04/2002 6:24:43 PM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BurkeCalhounDabney
sickle-cell anemia afflicts mainly blacks.

Yet not raced based.

It is based on proximity to malarial areas. Thus there are Asian populations prone to it and African populations not.

39 posted on 06/04/2002 6:24:46 PM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
Trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here, I will take it you mean by this provocative remark that there are not clear boundaries between the human "races". As groups, they overlap, blend, merge and generally confuse themselves.

Just because two groups overlap doesn't mean that they don't have statistically significant differences. You present a paper tiger, to what purpose I know not, but not to one I trust.

40 posted on 06/04/2002 6:25:12 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon
Where's that sign? "We Hire the Handicapped!"??

What, me working?




41 posted on 06/04/2002 6:26:58 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Comment #42 Removed by Moderator

To: ThePythonicCow
statistically significant differences

Good grief! The Europeans really like soccer!

43 posted on 06/04/2002 6:28:10 PM PDT by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
Just because two groups overlap doesn't mean that they don't have statistically significant differences.

Yes, possible. But not demonstrated biologically. Your proposition is excellent and experimentally it is shown to not be the case.

I am curious as to why you are hostile to something very simple and obvious?

44 posted on 06/04/2002 6:28:46 PM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
Tell me directly, what is this simple obvious fact to which you find me hostile. Be clear and unambiguous.
45 posted on 06/04/2002 6:30:48 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
Considering my comment provocative.
46 posted on 06/04/2002 6:33:43 PM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Comment #47 Removed by Moderator

To: BurkeCalhounDabney
I think that the real reason for this excessive zeal for color blindness (and gender, preference, religious, age, and whatever else blindness) is that it's part of the fundamental liberal confusion. Equality of result, not of opportunity. We are not of nature, with our various differences, rewarded according to a higher moral authority by some measure that we must strive to discover, but rather above nature, all equally deserving of identical outcomes. It's the pablum (spelling?) of the masses, the false ideal of a perfect society. It's communism, socialism, liberalism (in the current abuse of the word). It's tyranny.

It must be defeated, over and over again.

48 posted on 06/04/2002 6:35:54 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
No - I am asking not why you find my comment curious, but what is this something very simple and obvious of which you speak?
49 posted on 06/04/2002 6:37:12 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Arleigh
The idea of a "social construction" is that there's a real phenomena out there in the world, but that it's there because we believe it is. Example: Money is a social construction. Money really does have value. People will give you things for money. So there's no denying the reality of it. But ... it wouldn't have value unless people believed it did. Apply the analogy to race. There may be real differences between lightly and darkly complected people. The open question has to do with causality. Do our attitudes, beliefs, institutions, etc create those differences or not? Citing more and more evidence of the differences doesn't answer the causal question.
50 posted on 06/04/2002 6:37:28 PM PDT by ConsistentLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-329 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson